Quantcast

2008 Marzocchi Line-Up review... and other wierd stuff.

S.K.C.

S.K.C.

Turbo Monkey
Feb 28, 2005
4,096
25
Pa. / North Jersey
So while I was over at Sicklines I noticed the new review/ride report they had linked to NSMB:

http://www.sicklines.com/2007/06/13/2008-marzocchi-on-test-in-italy/

...what I can't figure out is Marz's weight table posted here:

http://photos.nsmb.com/showimage.php?i=15789&catid=newimages




Now I know that Marz has been a bit off in the past but... 6.88lbs for a Boxxer WC?!?!?!!

That's almost 7 pounds!...and what's more it says that they got this info directly from the manufacturer's website:




According to Marz. and the manufacturer's website information:

6.10 lbs. = 6.88 lbs.???

...REALLY?

...c'mon now...
 
jvnixon

jvnixon

Turbo Monkey
May 14, 2006
2,325
0
SickLines.com
Hehe, glad i wasn't the only one to notice that. I think they used the boxxer team weight (6.8lbs) and added on .08lbs for good measure
 
S.K.C.

S.K.C.

Turbo Monkey
Feb 28, 2005
4,096
25
Pa. / North Jersey
Of course.

But what I'm focusing on is the statement that Marz made at the bottom of the weight table which said they were getting their info directly from a manufacturer's website. Looking at this statement and analyzing it, one could see that there is an inaccuracy.
 
D

dropmachine

Turbo Monkey
Sep 7, 2001
2,922
10
Your face.
Mazocchi is so full of ****, they could be an outhouse.

The WC is 2800g dead on, uncut steerer and axle included. THe SL is much heavier (relatively). And knowing marzocchi, it won't have the proper oil levels, a steerer or the axle included.

Props to RS for honesty, and a good product.
 
W

WBC

Monkey
Aug 8, 2003
578
1
PNW
And that isn't considering most mounted Boxxer WC's (cut steerer, flat crown) come in around 5.9 scaled out.
 
vitox

vitox

Turbo Monkey
Sep 23, 2001
2,936
1
Santiago du Chili
dropmachine.com said:
Mazocchi is so full of ****, they could be an outhouse.

The WC is 2800g dead on, uncut steerer and axle included. THe SL is much heavier (relatively). And knowing marzocchi, it won't have the proper oil levels, a steerer or the axle included.

Props to RS for honesty, and a good product.
Click to expand...

i dont know about the 2008 product of course, but i have weighed on my own digital narcotics scale, the whole SL ATA family (xc700sl, am1sl, 888sl ata, 66sl ata) and in 3 out of 4 cases, published weights were spot on (with proper oil levels that were stock, way improved over last year) and the 4th case with the xc700sl that was lighter than published.

now of course, the weight for the boxxer is wrong thats a given and no good if they are comparing with the ocmpetition best get the facts straight.
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
BillT said:
So, is the 55 pretty much a Z1 replacement or does the Z1 live on?
Click to expand...
The Z1 had better damping - RC2. 55 has TST:plthumbsdown:

You suppose with the move overseas and the damper downgrade they'll lower their prices like they should:twitch:
 
vitox

vitox

Turbo Monkey
Sep 23, 2001
2,936
1
Santiago du Chili
mattmatt86 said:
Which totem is 5.9? I have mine at 6.3....
Click to expand...
well actually the most direct comparison would indeed be the totem 2step as the solo air doesnt have travel adjust like the ATA has, i think, flaws aside, this chart proves that no longer the zocchi line is the heaviest, actually its the other way around, sure, RS has the lightest XC fork in the SID and the lightest dh fork in the BWC but as a complete lineup the zocchi line is on par and even id say, lighter.
 
S

Spokompton

Monkey
May 15, 2005
321
0
Spokane WA
Meh...

Marz better have changed the 55 TST to something else like the rear shock TST.

The old fork version is total unreliable crapola!

Ohh well, at least the 66 forks haven't been screwed up too much.:poster_oops:

The 66 ATA is calling my name.... hey stud cakes... wanna ride me hard?...:clapping:
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
Spokompton said:
Meh...

Marz better have changed the 55 TST to something else like the rear shock TST.
Click to expand...
With TST designation the forks are an orifice damper while the shocks are shimmed - they only share the name at least it was that way in the past model years...
 
S

Spokompton

Monkey
May 15, 2005
321
0
Spokane WA
syadasti said:
With TST designation the forks are an orifice damper while the shocks are shimmed - they only share the name at least it was that way in the past model years...
Click to expand...
Are they still fixed on the fork TST though or have they changed to a spring loaded shim stack like the TST rear shocks?
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
Spokompton said:
Are they still fixed on the fork TST though or have they changed to a spring loaded shim stack like the TST rear shocks?
Click to expand...
I don't know. It definitely was a bad decision to use the same name for different damping systems:huh:

Traditionally the high-end Z1 and 66 have had shim stacks and the all mountain range had orifice dampers. It would be great if they got rid of the orifice dampers. The forks with the RC dampers are easier to work on too...
 
Udi

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,915
1,200
Hey V, what's the story on the RC3 damper? I got excited when I saw the rebound knob on the bottom ala rockshox (was thinking we might have an TPC/MC copy) but then when I read the chart they say "high speed and low speed compression controlled automatically by the bottom knob".

If they mean that the rebound knob controls LSC and HSC, that sucks! Sounds like what that stupid chris porter guy tried to sell to the world... any thoughts?
 
S

Spokompton

Monkey
May 15, 2005
321
0
Spokane WA
Udi said:
Hey V, what's the story on the RC3 damper? I got excited when I saw the rebound knob on the bottom ala rockshox (was thinking we might have an TPC/MC copy) but then when I read the chart they say "high speed and low speed compression controlled automatically by the bottom knob".

If they mean that the rebound knob controls LSC and HSC, that sucks! Sounds like what that stupid chris porter guy tried to sell to the world... any thoughts?
Click to expand...
I'm sure the rebound is on top, compression on bottom. Maybe it's the design of the damper that keeps them from getting the compression up top, without getting too complex.

RC3 is a marketing hoax, IMO. It says "auto" Hi-Lo compression, meaning one knob controls them both.

Needless to say, the RC2 damper compression knob controls both High and Low speeds too. With shimmed dampers, it's impossible to control the low speed without effecting the high speed to a degree.

RC3 is just another attempt by Marz's "genius" marketing team, saying, "Hey everyone else has Hi-Low, we can too without actually changing any parts! Just call it Hi-Low auto!":spam:

I would rather see an RC2 with compression on top, than any actual decoupled high speed adjust.

Meh x 10:plthumbsdown:
 
B

blue

boob hater
Jan 24, 2004
10,160
2
california
They fail to mention in their comparisons how downright ****ty their air stuff really is compared to RockShox and Fox...
 
vitox

vitox

Turbo Monkey
Sep 23, 2001
2,936
1
Santiago du Chili
Udi said:
Hey V, what's the story on the RC3 damper? I got excited when I saw the rebound knob on the bottom ala rockshox (was thinking we might have an TPC/MC copy) but then when I read the chart they say "high speed and low speed compression controlled automatically by the bottom knob".

If they mean that the rebound knob controls LSC and HSC, that sucks! Sounds like what that stupid chris porter guy tried to sell to the world... any thoughts?
Click to expand...

no i think they realized its more useful to have the comp knob on top, and somewhere along the line the translation got f'd up, the hi/lo auto sounds just like the RC2 comp adjuster in marzocchi marketing speak, still, having the comp ajust on top actually implies a large degree of redesign to the RC2 cartridge so i really wouldnt take anything for granted in terms of how damper layout, it might sounds like its the same cartridge but im not so sure if it is.
 
vitox

vitox

Turbo Monkey
Sep 23, 2001
2,936
1
Santiago du Chili
blue said:
They fail to mention in their comparisons how downright ****ty their air stuff really is compared to RockShox and Fox...
Click to expand...
i wouldnt put money on that, i know some of the changes they have made are exactly what was needed to make their air carts work and not only work but work great.
 
S.K.C.

S.K.C.

Turbo Monkey
Feb 28, 2005
4,096
25
Pa. / North Jersey
Jeez...

I didn't want this to turn into a "beat-up on Zoke" thread. Marz still makes superior quality forks. I just wanted Marz to be more careful in the details of their marketing campaigns.

True - Marz has had some issues with their 888 SL ATA, but remember the clusterfu@k that was the 02 - 04 Boxxer linuep? You had to plan on not only buying the fork but also what the cost would be to fix performance issues right out of the box.

Just to focus on the 888 SL ATA for a moment: It is a first-year product and as such there is always the high probablity that there will be some issues/growing pains that need to be ironed out. Marz. is a exemplary in this capacity - it makes effective changes to correct any issues that may be out there with their product line.

Personally I have zero complaints about the fit and finish of the two 888's that I have owned over the past 2 years. Once broken-in they are as smooth as butter, reliable, durable, and extremely low-maintance. I can't ask for much more than that in a fork. Now, as far as achieving more refined damping performance - yes, that is an area that could use improvement, but as far as the big picture goes - I love em'. :biggrin:
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
S.K.C. said:
Just to focus on the 888 SL ATA for a moment: It is a first-year product and as such there is always the high probablity that there will be some issues/growing pains that need to be ironed out. Marz. is a exemplary in this capacity - it makes effective changes to correct any issues that may be out there with their product line.
Click to expand...
Like others have mentioned, it seems like 08 will finally yield class leading air forks but it took them at least 5 years (I had a 2003 Z1 FR SL turd), not 1 year to get air dampers down.
 
J

JRogers

talks too much
Mar 19, 2002
3,785
1
Claremont, CA
syadasti said:
Like others have mentioned, it seems like 08 will finally yield class leading air forks but it took them at least 5 years (I had a 2003 Z1 FR SL turd), not 1 year to get air dampers down.
Click to expand...
Word. I have a 66sl right now (almost exactly the same as a 888sl) and I've had a few issues. Marz has had air forks for a long time and they had the 66sl last year as well (granted, it was a bit different, but seems to be perhaps even less troublesome than this year's fork).
 
S

Spokompton

Monkey
May 15, 2005
321
0
Spokane WA
As long as the new air forks get full travel on compression and extension, then they should be good to go.

My 06 66SL was a POS. Divey, never used the last inch of travel. Compression knob on bottom fell off, even after tightening it. Never extended all the way up. Twisted lowers that had to be replaced. Wouldn't clean my house after a party...

The thing that bugged me the most was how hard it was to lift the front end off wheelie drops, even for a light fork. The thing just wouldn't lift fast like my Boxxer which weighed more and was shorter AtoC.
 
B

bagtagley

Monkey
Jun 18, 2002
236
11
VA
BillT said:
Thanks! I wasn't sure as I hadn't seen anything about the new Z1's as of yet...everything has been about the 55, 66, and 888 that I've seen.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's not mentioned in any of the marketing materials I've seen. vitox, are you completely sure about that? Other discussions have said that the 55 is the replacement for both the Z1 and the AM series.

If that's the case, I'll be pretty bummed. I'm not giving up the RC2 damping, and the 66 is more fork than I need.
 
vitox

vitox

Turbo Monkey
Sep 23, 2001
2,936
1
Santiago du Chili
bagtagley said:
Yeah, it's not mentioned in any of the marketing materials I've seen. vitox, are you completely sure about that? Other discussions have said that the 55 is the replacement for both the Z1 and the AM series.

If that's the case, I'll be pretty bummed. I'm not giving up the RC2 damping, and the 66 is more fork than I need.
Click to expand...

well for 07 the difference between the z1 series and the all mountain series was that the z1's were open bath dampers, had the bolt on crown (sort of a swan song look back to the original z1, nice touch i thought) and didnt have the QR 20mm axle, the allmountain series had more travel (am1sl 160mm travel) than the z1, had tst dampers, and QR axles, features you can find on the new 55, hence to me it replaces the AM line.
 
Cave Dweller

Cave Dweller

Monkey
May 6, 2003
993
0
S.K.C. said:
Now I know that Marz has been a bit off in the past but... 6.88lbs for a Boxxer WC?!?!?!!

That's almost 7 pounds!...and what's more it says that they got this info directly from the manufacturer's website
Click to expand...
Marzocchi weighed the boxxer air with the steerer tube from the 888ata included, just to even things out......... :twitch:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom